A qualitative comparative case study (Guba & Lincoln, 1994) in four Norwegian Lower Secondary schools found, by method of classroom observation, three different types of “teaching communication”: “dialogic teaching communication,” “storytelling teaching communication,” and “reproducing teaching communication” (Aasebø, Midtsundstad, & Willbergh). “Teaching communication” is defined as teachers’ and students’ talk about the subject matter in whole-class teaching. The paper will present how “dialogic,” “storytelling,” and “reproducing teaching communication” allow students different opportunities to experience meaning from a Bildung-centred didactic perspective. From such a perspective, the teachers’ primary task is to interpret teaching content or matter (Bildungsinhalt) in such a way that it can give opportunities for students to experience meaning (educative substance/Bildungsgehalt) (Hopmann, 2007; Klafki, 2000; Willbergh, 2015). Connecting teaching content with students’ current and future life-worlds is crucial (Aasebø, 2011; Herbart, 2002). ‘Dialogic teaching communication’ provides students with opportunities to experience meaning: In whole-class talk a multitude of interpretations are uttered, some of which are possibly relevant to the life-worlds and experiences of the students. The diverse interpretations of displayed subject matter can be interpreted as an understanding of knowledge, indicating that teaching content can be interpreted into many different meanings. These opportunities, which are open to students, are reinforced by the speech aspect of “dialogic teaching communication”: students participate with their own interpretations of subject matter in whole-class talk. “Storytelling teaching communication” enables students to experience meaning from a Bildung-centred didactic perspective through the content aspect: Subject-matter talk is characterised by diverse interpretations of content. However, references, examples and concepts interpreting subject matter are mainly displayed by teachers’ talk, and students’ contributions are rare. “Reproducing teaching communication” allows few opportunities for students to experience meaning from a Bildung-centred perspective. It appears as if knowledge and content are considered to have only one, or a few, legitimate interpretations. Furthermore, students do not interpret freely by referring to their own life-world. Instead, they repeat and reproduce knowledge, or guess at what the teachers want to hear. Thus, “dialogic teaching communication” and “storytelling teaching communication” allow for open-ended interpretations of teaching content, and may give students support for finding their ways into their futures, whereas “reproducing teaching communication” operates with predefined meanings of the matter and predefined goals. “Reproducing teaching communication” was characteristic of the school in the sample, and which was under the greatest pressure to raise students’ achievements.

Aasebø, T. S. (2011). Anti-schoolness in context: The tension between the youth project and the qualifications project. Social Psychology of Education, 14 (4), 503‒518. doi: 10.1007/s11218-011-9153-3 Aasebø, T. S., Midtsundstad, J. H., & Willbergh, I. (20XX) Meaningful teaching in the age of accountability: Restrained by school culture? Manuscript submitted for publication. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 105‒117). London: Sage. Herbart, J. F. (2002). Allgemeine Pädagogik. With an introduction by Jeffrey Stern. Bristol: Thoemmes. Hopmann, S. T. (2007). Restrained teaching: The common core of Didaktik. European Educational Research Journal, 6 (2), 109–124. Klafki, W. (2000). Didaktik analysis as the core of preparation of instruction. In I. Westbury, S. T. Hopmann & K. Riquarts (Eds.), Teaching as a reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition (pp. 139‒159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. Willbergh, I. (2015). The problems of ‘competence’ and alternatives from the Scandinavian perspective of Bildung. Journal of Curriculum Studies. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2014.1002112